Longer Wireless Distance needed. Thoughts?

[JBullard]

DonFL wrote:

As far as Max-Paul's comment...if you're not translating freqs, definitely the case..need some isolation, and hence, some vertical separation for best results. But assuming different in and out freqs, I think you're ok. A little vertical separation would be nice, but thinking you wouldn't need much, if any.

So...if you're translating, assuming you can avoid all the other garbage on 900 ISM band, I think you'd be fine. I've run head-on into the crap that is in the 2.5ghz ISM band, and it is truly garbage..mainly security cameras from overseas.

I'm no RS-485 guru, but assuming xmit, rcv, and supply, you could break out the supply connections, keep the xmit and rcv intact, and have a portable ELL repeater. I'll defer to the experts on this piece, but don't recall anything else going on when it comes to 485 and what it would take to power these.

[align=left]From the ELL manual:[/align]
[align=left]The Easy Light Linker is based on a 10 MIP CPU directing a 900 MHz transceiver. There is a SAW filter between the antenna and the transceiver to provide for superior transmission purity and rejection of adjacent frequency signals during reception. The antenna used is a dipole to concentrate transmit energy and increase receiver sensitivity.[/align]
[align=left]Power is 9 vdc 50 ma on RX, 150 ma on TX [/align]
[align=left]Power is on the Cat5 supplied by the controller or the power supplied by the USB485B adapter[/align]

[JHolmes]

A lot of interesting thoughts I would prefer to keep everything LOR but I like the 485 idea for some aspects.

Allow me to throw a question into the mix.

We are now considering this for two projects and one of them is going to be in a highly populated area. While I don't expect many cordless phones, there will be a lot of cell phones, traffic, etc.

How do we know which channels the systems are on?
I read somewhere there is some sort of "scanner" that tells you what is free?

[JBullard]

The ELLs operate in the ISM band of 902 -928 Mhz. There should NOT be any cell phones or other portable equipment in that freq range. Mostly in a fixed location stuff. Very few cordless phones use these freq anymore as most have migrated to the 2.4 and 5.x mhz freq.

I use one of my "unlocked" tri-band ham radios to scan the ISM band when I'm setting up my ELLs, starting several days in advance and logging to the computer the freq any traffic was encountered on.

The 485 transmitter linked above would, in my opinion, be much more interference prone in your application due to the huge amount of stuff operating on those freq. From people walking around with wi-fi enabled smart phones, lap tops etc.

Just my opinions

[JHolmes]

JBullard wrote:

The ELLs operate in the ISM band of 902 -928 Mhz. There should NOT be any cell phones or other portable equipment in that freq range. Mostly in a fixed location stuff. Very few cordless phones use these freq anymore as most have migrated to the 2.4 and 5.x mhz freq.

I use one of my "unlocked" tri-band ham radios to scan the ISM band when I'm setting up my ELLs, starting several days in advance and logging to the computer the freq any traffic was encountered on.

The 485 transmitter linked above would, in my opinion, be much more interference prone in your application due to the huge amount of stuff operating on those freq. From people walking around with wi-fi enabled smart phones, lap tops etc.

Just my opinions

Your opinions are noted and greatly appreciated!

I truly appreciate you all participating in this discussion.
This has really helped me know what products are appropriate for what venues.

[JBullard]

While you are here, I'm at a friends house, and I was going to show her the 145 ft tree video. I can't get it to play (she has a brand new computer) so she is missing a video plug-in. Do I need to put Adobe Flash or some other player on her system?

[JHolmes]

JBullard wrote:

While you are here, I'm at a friends house, and I was going to show her the 145 ft tree video. I can't get it to play (she has a brand new computer) so she is missing a video plug-in. Do I need to put Adobe Flash or some other player on her system?

That is very strange! Where are you trying to watch from?
The portfolio part of our website should be compatible with everything...

I'm going to give you a direct link to our showcase album on Vimeo.
Let me know what browser you are using just for my records k?

Direct Link:
http://vimeo.com/album/1501994

[JBullard]

It was IE 9.0.8112.16421

I downloaded Adobe Flash and all is well.

Good luck on your project bids.

[JHolmes]

Glad to hear it!

Thank you very much

[Max-Paul]

JBullard wrote:

Max-Paul wrote:

But I would expect you would have to have some distance or on different planes so that the transmitting unit would not desensitize the receiver. And if I was trying to do this. I would put one on the lowest freq. and the other on the highest freq that they could be programmed to. I have no idea what the freq. rejection of these units are. So using them as repeaters might be a simple thing of just spacing them about 10' or if the freq. rejection is bad. You might have to separate them as far as 50'. Wish I had that kind of money to buy 4 units and play with them to find out the answer myself.

Still a lot of "speculation" comments in this thread.

The LOR ELLs are a very high quality transceiver.

I have set mine up in repeater mode, placed only a foot or two apart, and only separated by a couple channels apart, (out of the 32 available) with no interference from each other.

At least that has been my experience with mine used in repeater mode

You select your operating freg based on your local environment, to avoid 900 mhz cordless phones, baby monitors and etc. Unlike the LOR ELLs, most consumer electronic 900 mhz stuff has a very "messy signal", will splatter horribly. I usually try to stay a least 5 channels away from cordless phones and baby monitors. They are trashy.

Ah yes speculation on my part. Hence the reason for the last line in my earlier post. Wish I had enough money to buy 4 units to test. But it appears you do have enough money to buy at least 4 units if not more.
My speculation is based on some prior knowledge of repeaters. First and foremost is that this configuration does not use a duplex nor 6Mhz separation between the transmit freq and receive freq. All of this leaved me to error on the side of caustion and suggest more physical separation between the two repeater units. And greater freq separation.
Thanks for posting your real life experience using these ELLs in a repeater configuration. I would not have thought it possible till you posted otherwise.

[JBullard]

Max-Paul wrote:
Ah yes speculation on my part. Hence the reason for the last line in my earlier post. Wish I had enough money to buy 4 units to test. But it appears you do have enough money to buy at least 4 units if not more.
My speculation is based on some prior knowledge of repeaters. First and foremost is that this configuration does not use a duplex nor 6Mhz separation between the transmit freq and receive freq. All of this leaved me to error on the side of caustion and suggest more physical separation between the two repeater units. And greater freq separation.
Thanks for posting your real life experience using these ELLs in a repeater configuration. I would not have thought it possible till you posted otherwise.

________________________________________________________

I have been happily using the ELLs since 2007. And they are terrific and very versitle high quality units, unlike some cheap 485 transceiver units.

When thinking about using the ELLs as a repeater, forget anything you think you know about usual repeaters when dealing with these units. An amatuer or commercial repeater will have at least a 6 mhz freg separation or more between the tx and rx, but the TX is outputting anywhere between 5 watts to 100's of watts (before considering antenna gain).

With the ELLs, the power levels for TX are from 1 mw to a max of 32 mw, and the SAW filter between the antenna and the transceiver does an excellent job in keeping the signal pure in both the receive and transmit modes. So a large physical separation between the units is not necesary, especially when you follow good transmitting practice and only use the smallest amount of power necessary to achieve the distance needed.

As a general rule, I don't like to see replies to a question that are full of speculation with no facts or knowledge to back them up. Later on, someone may read the reply and think that everything in it is true, when in fact, almost nothing is. I always refrain from posting a reply unless I have real world experience with the product and have used the product in that application.

[Guest guest]

John..have you actually tried configuring/operating them back to back without controllers in between, or have your configurations always been what LOR would consider "typical" application, as described in the manual?

[JBullard]

Don,

For my applications, they have always been connected to controllers

[Guest guest]

I'm definitely using one "standard" link this year, maybe a second...but this thread has me dying to test the repeater solution..and then reality hits, and I realize, I need to be setting up in 6 months, no time to waste:shock:

[Max-Paul]

Yes, thanks for the lesson John.
It is much easier to sit back and say nothing, nether helping or taking a chance to say something that might not be 100% correct. There is an old saying "Nothing ventured, nothing gained". You where a bit to hard on my comments. True I have no experience with the ELL. Although my knowledge and experience with both military radios and Amateur radio. I have had some experiences with repeaters and duplexes. True I have not had a chance to work with equipment that operate below 100mW.

And it appears that you do not have the ability to read and remember. I only stated that there might be a need for separation of both physical distance, and frequency. Both of them need not be a "Deal Killer".

I take exception to the way you belittled me. A simple explanation of the error of my thinking would have serviced. I having a problem with saying that I am grateful for your pointing out how the low wattage makes it possible to have the two units within close proximity to each other. Again it is the cloaked and maybe not so cloaked hint that I should not have said anything cause I have not worked with the ELLs.

I here by announce, that in my opinion you are the forum know it all and proclaim that all asked questions will here forth be answered by your vast knowledge.
I await to bask in your knowledge, for I am but a padawan in your presents.

And I am sure that you will point out also that my lack of grammar and some spelling error are signs that I have no education either. Go ahead and pick me apart for that too.

[JHolmes]

BEFORE this thread becomes an emotional attack on credentials or "way of speech," let me curve the focus back to the ELL.

This thread started because I read on the LOR website that the max distance for an ELL is 500 ft.
However, the downloadable packet says 1000 ft, to which many of you corrected me. And I thank you.

I have seen many threads go south because people:

A) Said something when they had no clue what they were talking about.
Said something absolutely right but were then attacked because of their lack of stated previous experience.
C) Someone takes a forum post too personally and decides to "fight back."

For part A, the poster is absolutely in the wrong and we can kindly correct the wrong statement.

For part B, it is the responsibility of the poster to list his or her credentials. However, if he does not, there is nothing wrong with asking for more details. We do not need to chastise anybody, however, when we may not know the whole story. I know a guy who got ripped to pieces on the Planet Christmas forum because he made a suggestion without stating his previous experience and the other posters destroyed him.

For Part C, this is just unacceptable. The whole point of a forum is to spread ideas! So if you are going to get emotional, take it outside.

Again, thank you for all who have been so helpful in determining the compatibilities of the ELL.

Back on track again, does anybody have suggestions for wireless e1.31?
I see the ELL has a max speed of 56KBPS and I have a Stellascape controller that runs wired at 10/100 MBPS.

Thoughts?

[Guest wbottomley]

[JBullard]

JHolmes wrote:

Back on track again, does anybody have suggestions for wireless e1.31?
I see the ELL has a limited speed of 56KBPS and I have a Stellascape controller that runs wired at 10/100 MBPS.

Thoughts?

Contact Ed Bryson at http://www.joshua1systems.com/ Ed has done a lot of co-development work with Andrew at Stellascapes regarding e1.31 boards and software/firmware

His email: edb@joshua1systems.com

[JHolmes]

Will do

[JHolmes]

Jeff, see 5 posts above.

[JHolmes]

No, before that.